1. The Defendant’s disposition of suspending construction works against the Plaintiff on April 24, 2015 is revoked.

2. Of the costs of lawsuit.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On October 17, 2007, L filed an application with the Defendant for a new construction permit of 4 Dongs with animal-related facilities (hereinafter “instant money death”) on the ground at regular Eup/Myeon. On November 2, 2007, L obtained the construction permit of the instant money death from the Defendant (hereinafter “instant construction permit”).

L has reported the commencement of construction to the Defendant on November 7, 2007, but was issued a commencement report certificate on November 7, 2007, but did not commence construction due to the occurrence of malodor.

B. L filed a report on the change of the name of the owner of the instant building permit to the Plaintiff from L, and the Plaintiff, on September 4, 2014, obtained a certificate of change of construction participants from the Defendant and commenced the instant money construction work on April 23, 2015.

C. On April 24, 2015, the Defendant issued an order to suspend the construction of the Plaintiff for the following reasons (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

【Reasons for Suspension of Works】

(a)a large number of community residents have filed a petition due to concerns over malodor, dust, psychological damage, degradation of neighboring crops, etc. due to the scale, location, characteristics of livestock pens, etc.;

(b) In accordance with Article 21 (4) of the Administrative Procedures Act, the work shall be resumed after the prior notification of the disposition under Article 21 of the Administrative Procedures Act is omitted, the suspension of construction work is taken, the civil source is resolved smoothly, due to the concern of physical conflict between the residents and the owner of the building.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant did not go through the procedures such as prior notice and submission of opinions as prescribed by the Administrative Procedures Act in rendering the instant disposition. 2) The Defendant issued the instant disposition on the grounds of a civil petition filed by neighboring residents, but this does not constitute a violation of the provisions of the Building Act. Thus, the instant disposition is legally based on its legal basis.